It’s fashionable to talk about Mystery Method like it’s old (furry) hat. This is a natural part of the modernist intellectual approach – we assume that progress is a forward line and thus the newer is better than the old. The lazy eye can see supporting evidence throughout the world – new video games are better than old, new mobile phones better than old etc. Thus technological progress, which is culmulative, is equivocated with general societal or intellectual progress. So too is capital accumulation. As any liberal (and I mean that in it’s actual sense, not the Obama-voting retard sense) knows the forces of free market capitalism lead to a harnessing of man’s productive energies into creating consumption goods and intermediate products (capital). As more work is done but not consumed, the capital wealth of society is increased leading to ever increasing productivity and thus material progress.
So simple retards, and yes that includes most intellectuals, equivocate these two undeniable forces of progress with a progress in ideas. Oh no. It’s pretty easy to see that the economics and sociology of the 1920s is light years ahead of the current commie scrubbers infesting universities. So onto Mystery Method.
Although flawed, the Method remains the widest, deepest and most perceptive treatise on picking up girls to ever see print. Just as Islamist scholars are constantly trawling the Koran to fabricate evidence that all the great advances of civilisation where not due to white Christians but actually arab Muslims, so too does Jambone trawl Mystery Method to tell me he thought of everything first too. But unlike the Islamists, Jambone has a point.
A statistic I just pulled out of my arse is that 95% of PUAs practicising MM don’t understand it. They think MM is thumbrings, furry hats, negs and rountines. Or “acting like a prick” for short. They have an engineer’s logorythmic understanding of MM like it’s a machine code program to follow step by step until the girl ends up in your bed. It goes like this:
1. Lame opinion opener – “Hey. I need an opinion of something. Are starfish scarier than spiders?”
2. Neg – “Hey, you’re a fucking bitch whore. Haha, just joking. So, get this…..”
3. Routine – “So me and Hef are racing our Ferraris around Colin Farrell’s mansion yard”
4. Kino – * touch upper arm”
5. Routine – “Have you been to New York? No? Anyway, here’s a crazy caper that happened there…..”
6. Salsa-spin, high-five.
7. Palm reading
8. Isolate – “We’re going over here now. What do you mean, why? You’re like my bratty kid sister, how do you guys roll with her?
9. Get slapped. Go home alone.
10. Write field report on a forum.
Let’s just be straight. This is not Mystery Method. This is Retard Game. To do MM you have to actually read the book, absorb the principles, then come up with your own free conversation and body language consistent with the principles on the spot. You aren’t running an algorythm, you are in a two-way interaction with another human being who has hopes, dreams, plans, intentions of her own which will shape how you interact with her. Thus you don’t move from A2 to A3 after you’ve done three routines. You move when she shows you she is attracted to you. You don’t neg the target right after the opener – you neg her if she is being prissy and needs taking down a notch, and if she doesn’t act prissy then you don’t need to neg at all.
Don’t get down on MM just because clowns like Mehow are micro-analysing every single sentence into a multi-stage flowchart with feedback loops while completely missing the point. Don’t get down on MM just because a pack of skinny beta pork pie hat-wearing retards in Tiger Tiger are blowing up every set by acting like douchebags. If you’re new to game, stick with MM but understand that it’s an extremely deep system which only works when you get the priniciples and drop the superficial trappings.
December 29, 2010 at 10:35 pm
Krauser, do you have a book to recommend that’s better at conveying principles than MM?
January 1, 2011 at 12:04 am
No. Just read MM.
December 30, 2010 at 12:09 am
Krauser, what’s your take on Roissy’s endorsement of the Mystery Method?
“Sometimes ignorance really is bliss. Of the last 25 out of 30 girls I’ve slept with, I’ve used the following game tactics on all of them in almost the same order and at the same point in time of the pickup:
wall of text removed – ed
January 1, 2011 at 12:04 am
Roissy strikes me as being calibrated, good non-verbals, and bringing plenty of value to the table. Thus the MM is simply the structure he funnels the girls along. If a guy lacking those characteristics tried the same thing it wouldn’t work. It’s this latter type of guy I’m mocking.
December 30, 2010 at 2:05 am
his is a natural part of the modernist intellectual approach – we assume that progress is a forward line and thus the newer is better than the old. The lazy eye can see supporting evidence throughout the world – new video games are better than old, new mobile phones better than old etc. Thus technological progress, which is culmulative, is equivocated with general societal or intellectual progress.
Mystery made a unique contribution to human knowledge. Very few people can fully appreciate and digest the prior remark.
December 30, 2010 at 2:27 am
I get it, Evan.
Making fun of PUA chump noobs is so soo sooo funny.
December 30, 2010 at 3:16 am
Really glad to see you write this. I never understood the MM bashing. Everytime I read that book I count my blessings that such a work even exists.
My guess would be that people choose to blame the method for their lack of results instead of considering that maybe the error was in their application.
You rightly noted that attention needs to be paid to the principles behind what’s being advised over the specific routine the book includes. In my experience the method works, but whether or not you can correctly apply it is another matter.
December 30, 2010 at 9:25 am
sorry to be “that guy” but equivocate doesn’t mean what you think it means.
December 30, 2010 at 9:27 am
i think you mean equate.
January 1, 2011 at 12:00 am
Nope. I mean equivocate in the sense it’s used in informal logic as an argumentative fallacy.
the word “progress” is being equivocated between it’s obviously true meaning (culmulative technological and capital development) and it’s not true meaning (social and cultural advancement)
January 5, 2011 at 7:49 am
i wasn’t aware of that meaning. i stand corrected
December 30, 2010 at 12:08 pm
MM may only have its uses in a select area, but that why Game has progressed. It’s taking principles from a variety of sources and forming a system that works for you, in a variety of settings.
How I would act with younger girls differs slightly with older girls. Daygame is different to nightgame. If I’m the only natural/learned alpha in the room, I’ll be running differently to if I’m surrounded by douchebags and the uni’s rugby team.
December 30, 2010 at 2:25 pm
As I see it, the main advantage of the MM and other PUA info material is that the basics are very much consensual now – and effective. The next step is that this basic knowledge will go mainstream and it will soon be ridiculous to publish “buy her a drink/make her a compliment” style of BS that still is the bread and butter of male dating advice in the main steam media. Never mind that the MM is not 100% perfect, at least it is not the 90% BS we get served daily on TV, newspapers and magazines.
So, I hail the MM – and also “The game”.
December 30, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Have you read this ?
Old school PUA wisdom.
December 30, 2010 at 9:53 pm
Krauser, don’t you state in your ‘Day Game Model’ that you neg targets you meet in the street almost immediately in the interaction?, as part of the process of getting them to qualify themselves. I say this, as you are saying in this posting that you shoud only neg if the target is acting in such a way as to warrant it’s inclusion.
I would love to hear your comments on this…….
December 31, 2010 at 11:57 pm
Here I talk about the “neg” as it’s commonly misunderstood, as a pre-scripted way of essentially insulting a girl, as part of a routine. In my daygame model I talk about gentle teases which are directly related to the statement of interest in the opener. Saying to a girl “you blink alot” has nothing to do with the thread you opened with, so it’s more like a neg. Complimenting a girl on her fashion and then saying it’s weird is thematically related. A second difference is calibration – the tease should be calibrated to the girl and the situation – I’m mocking the Mystery tards here because they tend to lack calibration. Ultimately there’s not that much difference between the neg and the tease, so I wouldn’t get hung up on it.
January 1, 2011 at 11:31 pm
Thanks for some clarity on that. I have been adapting my game in be centred more on the day game model, as it suits my situation better than MM. I too agree that if you let yourself, you evolve into an amalgamation of natural and aquired technique, and this is the way forward.
Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: New Year, New Leaf Edition
January 2, 2011 at 7:20 pm
An advantage of Mystery Method is that the rigid structure, so closely resembling a game like AD&D, gets through to the most hopeless nerdy guys, like, well, ones who play AD&D. When I first found Game, I was spending most my evenings watching anime by my lonesome. If someone had come up and told me I just needed to go talk to a bajillion women, I’d be like “Yeah… you’re right… …time for the next episode of Great Teacher Onizuka” It wouldn’t have gotten me off my ass and into the club! MM may have a lot of bullshit but it’s something that can break through the shell of an otherwise really hopeless guy like the guy I used to be. (Later, after talking to those bajillion women, one can transition to a better school such as Real Social Dynamics)
January 14, 2011 at 10:08 pm
You can either wear fuzzy hats and googles like these clueless guys.. or you can do it the right way: http://goo.gl/obiC
January 17, 2011 at 10:04 am
I’m flattered to be in your pictures 🙂